#2

Point #2 “We’re sick of hearing about values and mission statements”

While I admit to a certain degree on discomfort with all of the efforts put into identifying values and crafting mission statements, it’s a little disingenuous to make this suggestion is a piece at least partly written to make the point that millennial’s values aren’t being taken seriously.   In fact, two paragraphs after the above title, the author actually proposes a mission statement. 

So, I’ll agree with him that there is a disproportionate amount of time put into trying to re-state the simple, but it’s clear that he agrees with the value of such statements.  It could be argued that Jesus was the first to the mission statement parade with the two now known as “The Great Commandment” and “The Great Commission”.  I guess if one is going to follow Jesus, then it’s OK to have a mission statement.

Solutions

“Stop wasting time on the religious mambo jambo and get back to the heart of the gospel.  If you have to explain your mission and values to the church, it’s overly religious and much too complicated”

I mostly agree with this although I have a few reservations.  1.  In today’s church we see people coming from increasingly diverse backgrounds and cultures, given that reality, it seems reasonable to have some sort of unifying principles around which the church can gather.   2.  If his underlying thesis is correct (that millennials are hostile to “the church”, then it seems reasonable that having some sort of unifying principles is helpful to those who are looking so that they can get a sense of what the focus of the congregation is.  3.  Both the author and Jesus did exactly this, so it seems like more of an issue of time involved and complexity, than of the existence of mission/values statements.

“We’re not impressed with the hours you brag about spending behind closed doors wrestling with Christianese words on paper.  We’re impressed with actions and service.”

No argument, if a church is going to have a mission statement, then it’s clear that a failure to live up to that mission statement is a huge problem.   Now, “actions and service” is a pretty subjective measurement, especially for a group who is skeptical of the church and significantly uninvolved.   Of course, if one is going to apply the “actions and service” standard to one group (“the church”), then it would make sense to apply the same standard to another group (millennials), wouldn’t it?   I’d be curious to see statistics regarding millennials charitable contributions and volunteerism levels compared to other generations. 

This item points out one of the major failings of this entire piece.  “the church” is really a spectrum.  It’s not monolithic, it’s not all the same.  So, to treat “the church” as such is problematic.  I can point out plenty of churches that are all about “actions and service”, and I can point out plenty that are not.  The author’s problem is that he is not willing or able to take the time to differentiate between the options, but instead chooses to paint with a broad brush.   The churches who thrive on “actions and service” are there, maybe he’s just not looking hard enough.

Finally, I’ve spent that last 10 years working for a Christian organization involved in providing affordable housing worldwide.  Our entire effort is focused on engaging volunteers in the mission and the process.  I can state categorically that (in my experience) if the author’s claim is correct (that millennials want “actions and service”), that millennials are not living up to what they expect from others.

I know that my experience isn’t representative of anything broader than my experience, but after 10 years of working with 2,500-3,500 volunteers per year I think I might have a tiny bit of data to base my opinion on.